User talk:Blink44182

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Blink44182, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Minor Threat. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Guerillero | My Talk 19:46, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Straight Edge

Hi Blink44182. Before editing a section on wikipedia that is fully referenced, please check the references to make sure any new information you provide is not contradicted. Your recent edits to the opening paragraph of Straight Edge directly contradict the information provided in the references, and have accordingly been reverted, as the information you provided was not backed up, it therefore attributes a statement to the references that is incorrect. As per wikipedia guidelines:

"The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true."

Please find references from reliable sources to back up any statements you make, otherwise your edits may be reverted. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 06:33, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Blink44182. I'm not sure what part of my previous message you did not understand, but accordingly your most recent edit to the opening paragraph of Straight Edge constituted as vandalism. The simple fact is your belief that promiscuous sex is a core principle of straight edge is just your opinion, it is not backed up by any reliable sources. Have a read of this interview with Minor Threat [1], in the interview Ian and Lyle express regret that certain people took their lyrics "don't drink, don't smoke, don't fuck" literally as a set of rules. The concept of rules goes completely against the whole idea of hardcore. According to Minor Threat, Straight Edge was about moderation - "Not letting any one thing - be it booze, "pussy", "dick", coke, skateboarding, music, or STRAIGHT EDGE, rule your life".

If you continue to make unreferenced opinionated additions to articles where a consensus has already been reached, you may be blocked from editing. Please read the talk page of the article. Freikorp (talk) 04:10, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blink44182. You have new messages at Freikorp's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ok, the two references you provided don't seem to back up your statement. One seems to just say Ian Mackaye is a vegetarian, which is completely irrelevant to the opening paragraph. Your second reference links to a book; whilst the information may well and truly be inside this book, you have to link to or state the specific page, which you have not done. You have also completely removed the previous reference, which is a serious case of vandalism. You cannot remove a reference just because a new reference you've found contradicts it, the appropriate thing to do would be to list what one reference says, then what the other reference says. Freikorp (talk) 10:13, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also just letting you know you cannot use another wikipedia article as a reference. Freikorp (talk) 00:47, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When a recent edit is contended, as is the case on the Straight Edge page, rather than getting into an edit war, the appropriate thing to do is to discuss the issue on the talk page, and reach a consensus. Please read the long discussion on the talk page if you have not already done so. Freikorp (talk) 12:11, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Descendents

Funtrivia.com is a completely unreliable sourced. Wikipedia's verifiability and biographies of living persons policies require that information be referenced to "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." Funtrivia.com fails all of these criteria. The Descendents never aligned themselves with straight edge and never espoused any alignment with it. I've read dozens of sources and interviews with the band (I recently rewrote and referenced nearly every article on their albums), and not a single one mentioned straight edge. Just because a band or a person is anti-drug does not make them straight edge (and incidentally, the only song on Milo Goes to College that has any kind of anti-drug message is "Bikeage", and it's about a girl who Bill doesn't want anything to do with because she's a heroin-addicted prostitute). --IllaZilla (talk) 00:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The other source you're citing, the band's FAQ, flat-out says that they weren't straight edge: [2]

Q: Are the DESCENDENTS straight edge? A: (Karl)- Descendents were around before the song "Straight Edge" so it's really a moot point. The answer to the question is no, though Bill's never done any drugs at all.

The only statement you can accurately cite from this statement is "Bill Stevenson has never done drugs." Please see WP:NOR and WP:BLP. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:25, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits are full of original research, which includes claims not explicitly supported by the sources. It's clear that the intention of your edits is to draw a connection between the Descendents and straight edge, but in reality there is no connection: the only reliable source you have cited explicitly says that the band had nothing to do with the straight edge movement. The paragraph you are adding contains a number of claims not supported by this or any source:

That the Descendents and 7 Seconds shared the same values about drugs, sex, and alcohol — Nothing in the sources makes any connection between the Descendents and 7 Seconds, nor does any source mention anything about the Descendents' attitude towards drugs, sex, or alcohol.
That the original Descendents lineup "personally held those values to themselves, and embraced the values personally, rejected drugs, alcohol, and casual sex and even depicted down upon it and made fun of it." — This is totally unsupported by any source. None of the sources mention that the Descendents "personally held the values of straight edge", and none of their songs "depicted down" or made fun of drugs, alcohol, or casual sex. The source cited only mentions that Bill never did drugs; it says nothing about the other members or anything about alcohol or sex.
That Bill and Milo were directly influenced by Ian MacKaye's values. — Again, none of the sources draw any connection between the Descendents and Ian MacKaye, and MacKaye's values have nothing to do with the themes of the early Descendents as the Descendents were around well before Minor Threat and the two bands had almost nothing to do with each other.
That the Descendents were part of the straight edge community — Again, a claim totally unsupported by any reliable sources, and the only source cited explicitly says they weren't straight edge.

In sum, the text you are adding violates 3 of our core policies: Verifiability, Original research, and Biographies of living persons. If you continue to re-add this material without citing sources that explicitly verifiy your claims, I will have little option but to report it to ANI and probably request that you be blocked from editing. I would rather not do that, so instead of re-inserting the same claims please take the subject to the article's talk page for discussion. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:43, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I realize what I've stated and how that seems. I'm sorry for not citing any reliable references but as it seems to me Descendents are positive and are pretty straight as far as drugs, alcohol and sex goes just over past reading of interviews and such. I will not continue to add any information unless it is completely sourced. Sorry for the disrupt. --Blink44182 (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 00:29, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Descendents, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. I'm sorry to use a templated warning on you, but you're just not getting the substance of "no original research". You can't just keep re-inserting your text and assume that adding links underneath it is proper sourcing. You either need to find sources that explicitly back up your info, or you need to reword your info so that it accurately reflects the sources. The statment in question is: "This album encompassed a different approach in writing, unlike most of their peers in the Los Angeles hardcore scene who were writing about common subjects in Hardcore at the time such as authority, politics, etc. Descendents branched off into a different writing genre." None of your sources explicitly support these claims. --IllaZilla (talk) 07:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to Milo Aukerman. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. Again, the problem here is that none of your sources actually support your information. None of them mention anything about Aukerman "taking a different approach to the material he would write, unlike most of his Los Angeles peers in the Hardcore world who embraced the 'Live Fast, Die Young' approach." Slapping more links on does not mean that the sources explicitly support this claim. Either find sources that explicitly support the words you're adding, or reword the info to more accurately reflect the source material. --IllaZilla (talk) 07:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to File:7seconds SV1.jpg has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. I notice that you have been uploading images to Wikimedia Commons, claiming that you are the copyright holder. However, a quick Google image search revealed to me that these images are in fact from various websites and blogs; I am extremely skeptical that you are the copyright holder, especially of an image taken in 1982. Since it appears that you have uploaded these images under false licenses, I will be reporting them for deletion. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's non-free content criteria and do not upload images under false licenses. If you did not take the photo or create the image yourself, then you must specify where you got it. Photos taken from websites, and album artwork, are almost always subject to copyright. If you are in fact the copyright holder and this message is in error, then I apologize, but please provide an explanation or some evidence that you are, in fact, the creator or copyright holder of these images. IllaZilla (talk) 00:40, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 72.0.39.12

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 21:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Black Flag (band), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --IllaZilla (talk) 03:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Internal links

Hi. Please check the pages you are linking to before you save your changes on wikipedia. You recently internally linked to the page Carry On on the article for Straight edge. If you click on the link to Carry On you will see it goes to a disambiguation page rather than an actual article. Please check internal links before you save them in the future to make sure this does not happen. Also please do not replace valid internal links with non-existant one as you also did at Straight edge - the page xDEATHSTARx exists; the page xTyrantx does not. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 22:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Straight edge

If you are going to copy content from one page to another please provide attribution per the license. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 00:10, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]